FLARM

Hi

This summer season in Australia has seen our first use of FLARM
anti-collision system for gliders.
http://www.flarm.com/index_en.html
and
http://www.rf-developments.com/page008.html
(the local manufacturer for Australia)

It would seem that FLARM is becoming very rapidly accepted here in
Australia (my club now has all club gliders and tugs and all but a
couple of private gliders and tugs) fitted. I know that in continental
Europe (where FLARM originated) it is also very widespread.

I am interested in how the UK and US gliding fraternity feel about it -
and whether FLARM may also be of interest to the micro/ultralight and
hang glider fraternity.

Robert

jcarlyle wrote:
I know, ADSB is what is being touted, but price is never mentioned. A
$500 dollar FLARM unit in all US aircraft would probably be much
cheaper than ADSB. Getting the FAA to sign on to or to back FLARM,
though, is another big problem.

Current ADS-B transceivers are expensive, right now, because they are
currently being produced in small quantities. In fact, a basic ADS-B
UAT (Universal Access Transceiver) is essentially no more complex or
expensive to implement than a FLARM-like device. The difference is
price comes down to the cost of certification and manufacturing to TSO
requirements. If a FLARM-like device was mandated by the FAA, it would
cost nearly as much as an ADS-B UAT.

Perhaps it would be beneficial to approach both SSA and AOPA about
FLARM, to try to get them to back it rather than ATSB?

There is a minute chance that the SSA could be convinced, but AOPA has
already thrown its support to ADS-B...

Marc

Thanks for the info, Marc. Do you know what kind of time frame is
envisioned for us to see a quantity produced ADS-B UATS? And, do you
think it will be a low current drain device?

-John

jcarlyle wrote:

know, however, there are frequency band problems in the US as well as
legal problems. Indeed, a lot of what I've read indicates that the
legal issues have been responsible for stopping FLARM's introduction
into the US.

No, it's the FLARM people's fear of the US liability issues. Therefore
they (the FLARM people) explicitely forbid the use of FLARM in US
registered aircraft, in US airspace or with an US citicen on board.

Stefan

Thanks, Stephan - what you said about "fear of liability" is what I
meant by "legal issues".

I've done some Googling to learn more about ADS-B. Here's a technology
overview link: http://www.flyadsb.com/techoverview/techoverview.htm,
and here's something on the avionics installation:
http://www.flyadsb.com/downloads/Avi...lers_v0.83.pdf. The bad
news for glider pilots is that the Garmin GDL-90 is $8,000 list, the
Garmin MX20 is $8,500 list, and the installation weighs almost 24 lbs.

Seems to me, if the FAA and AOPA are going forward with ADS-B, that
what is needed for gliders is an ADSB-Lite. This wouldn't take
advantage of any of the ground based part of ATS-B. Rather, it would
just implement the airborne part of ATS-B and would use a simple
FLARM-like sector/height LED display. GPS data could come from an
existing GPS in the glider, and the transmitter could be deliberately
low-powered so it would have only a 5 mile range.

Liability is of course the issue. How about naming the device the HAT
Alert? HAT stands for Half Assed Traffic, simultaneously indicating
that you're only getting some of the airborne traffic picture, and
hopefully blocking legal challenges when Joe Doofus ignores the alert
and gets mid-aired.

Those who are more versed in this field, would you please educate me?
I'm sure there's significant problems with this approach I haven't
thought of.

-John

Currently in the UK there is little or no interest
in FLARM, I know of no glider that has it fitted and
long may it remain so.
The cockpit area in gliders is cluttered enough and
battery life with current units is unacceptable.

At 04:18 05 March 2006, Jcarlyle wrote:
Thanks for the info, Marc. Do you know what kind of
time frame is
envisioned for us to see a quantity produced ADS-B
UATS? And, do you
think it will be a low current drain device?

-John

Tim Newport-Peace wrote:

I have heard of a suggestion that FLARM should be made mandatory for
International Competitions, in which case how will Americans and
Canadians compete if they are excluded from using FLARM as stated in the
FLARM manual?

Perhaps the Australians would be willing to sell us units?

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"

Perhaps the Australians would be willing to sell us units?


Yeah we could chuck in a few bags of wheat as well.



http://rf-developments.com/page008.html

Mal wrote:
Perhaps the Australians would be willing to sell us units?


Yeah we could chuck in a few bags of wheat as well.
http://rf-developments.com/page008.html

We have quite a bit of wheat already, but maybe a few bottles of Shiraz?
The big ones?


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA

www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
Operation"

At 16:30 05 March 2006, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
This reply is typical of Don, but is not representative
of UK thinking.
At a nominal 55mA current drain, this should not significantly
affect
Battery life. If Don had ever seen a FLARM display
he might not utter
such ill-informed opinions about cluttering the cockpit.

True, there are, AFAIK, no FLARM installations in UK,


Sorry Tim, I think that what I said is truly representative
of the thinking of UK glider pilots. I have yet to
speak to any who have a burning desire to install FLARM,
or indeed transponders.
I bet you a new FLARM unit that I could find more pilots
who don't want FLARM or who don't care than you can
find pilots that desire it.

I do not have room on my panel for any additional display

The reasons for my view may not be representative of
UK thinking, but I think you would have to admit that
there is general apathy surrounding FLARM in the UK.